Particle physics when light wave expands infinitely

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of light as it expands infinitely from a point source and its particulate nature upon absorption. It explores whether a photon is absorbed at the average center of a wave or at a random location within the wave envelope, with the consensus leaning towards the average center. The conversation also questions if a digital telescope array can capture a photon if it is smaller than the wave's diameter, suggesting that the wave would bend around the array if not fully intercepted. Clarifications reveal that individual photons do not expand; instead, they exist as discrete particles with a wave function representing their probability of location. Overall, the complexities of light's behavior challenge traditional understandings, emphasizing the unique nature of photons and their interactions with detection systems.
davea0511
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
What happens to the particulate nature of light as a light expands outward infinitely from a single point light source. Pretty much all light in the universe does that, except only where lensing takes place to create a non-divergent beam of light ... although I think such a thing is a near impossibility (low-divergence happens though - the result of lensing).

Consider one photon expanding radially from a single point light source. It only exhibits particulate nature when it is absorbed, yes? And there is a specific location where this absorption takes place, yes?

In otherwords, consider the following scenario:

Say you have an array of digital telescopes side by side focused on a low light source like from a extra-solar planet. That planet will reflect light as a wave as it moves through space, expanding radially as it goes so that only one photon/second should reach the telescope array, but since light is particulate in nature upon absorption only one telescope out of the entire array will see the photon.

We know that because upon absorption it has both a finite location and fixed energy.

Which brings me back to my questions ... all light waves in the universe gets infinitely thin over time as they radiate radially from a point source ... so when absorbed as a photon:

1) Is it focused at the average center of the wave, regardless the size of the wave? Or is it a random location of the photon within the wave envelope - if so what would determine that location?
2) If a digital telescope array is too small to absorb the photon's entire wave diameter, will the wave bend around the array and then continue it's path, even if the array is centered on the middle of the photon's wave? It seems this must happen because the array has to be large enough to intercept the entire wave, because as light moves it's not particulate in nature unless an entire photon's worth of energy is absorbed and a partial wave can NOT be converted to a low energy photon (ie. a single photon energy is fixed and constant for a given frequency).

I assume the answer to the first is that the location of the photon upon absorption would be centered. The second question is I think the more difficult one ... and the more interesting.

-Dave
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
An individual photon does NOT expand. When talk about "light waves expanding infinitely" you are either talking about many different photons moving from a central starting point or the "wave function" of a single photon which indicates the probability that photon will be found at a specific point.
 
What you say sounds different than what I remember from my physics class 20 years ago, which is not surprising ... lost in translation perhaps, or muddied by time. What you say is much easier to grasp.

I thought each individual photon behaved literally as a wave when moving through space ... not that it remains a discrete particle of energy when flying through space and is only part of a wave of particles. The wave function, you say, is the probability of where it is likely to be in relation to the other particles of the wave? Gee that almost seems intuitively obvious when compared to the weird way I previously understood the wave phenomena of individual photons.

Your clarification makes light seem not as weird. But it is still very weird - where it's speed seems fixed to the observer and not to the source (though I know even that isn't an entirely accurate statement).

I do want to understand this though ... so the wave-probability you speak of ... does this mean the probability of a photon's location, if graphed with respect to a point in time, is roughly congruent to the detected frequency of the light?

And does that mean the along it's axis a single photon travels in a perfectly straight line?

Thanks in advance for the info!
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top